Spreadsheet, Rights

[From Dag Forssell (940613 2015)] [Bill Leach 940613.19:22]

Again, I have got to get something to run some of these programs.
I realized that I have Dag's diskette but I don't seem to have a
spreadsheet that will run the "program".

Shame on you. Read the Readme files. In several places you will
find mention of the subdirectory ASEASY, which holds a shareware
spreadsheet program. You have no excuse.

... mankind, to be part of nature.

In your example, neither has the unconditional right to prevent
(control) the other. Some additional parameters must exist. At one
time, that was "property rights", today...

What are rights? Where do they reside? The only thing that
matters is who controls best. If I can control a horse by shaping
the horse's environment in a certain way, the horse will have to do
my bidding if it wants to eat. The horse has no rights as such,
other than what I choose to grant it. The same for my infant kids.
Rights do not have to exist at all. They are perceptual
constructs.

When we talk about property rights, we are talking about agreements
between humans, enforceaading towards the west. Ok, so I had to swim away from it,
going east. I was bound to hit beach sooner or later. As I started a
started a
Status: RO

leisurely crawl, I regretted not being in as good shape as I could have
been. But I could always float when I got tired, then start again in a
few minutes.

As I swam, I felt the beginnings of panic. You're going to be out here until nightfall. You might miss the beach. Might be swimming a very
long time. Might... Damn it. I shut it out, and concentrable - sometimes - by our institutionalized
means of overwhelming force, as administered by other humans.

Best, Dag

<[Bill Leach 940614.19:42 EST(EDT)]

[Dag Forssell (940613 2015)]

Shame on you. Read the Readme files. In several places you will
find mention of the subdirectory ASEASY, which holds a shareware
spreadsheet program. You have no excuse.

Oh yes I do! I am quite well aware of the existance of the program
ASEASY.EXE however, that program executes only in a DOS environment and I
am not running any DOS machines here.

That is an example of a common perception that is often wrong; "Anytime
that someone is talking about computers that they might personally use,
the computer must be a DOS box."

What are rights? Where do they reside? The only thing that
matters is who controls best.

That sounds like survival of the fittest.

When we talk about property rights, we are talking about agreements
between humans, enforceable - sometimes - by our institutionalized
means of overwhelming force, as administered by other humans.

And this is not relevent to human behaviour?

I agree that these are not directly PCT issues in the sense that they say
much about PCT (though studying how these institutionalized agreements
come about from a PCT oriented perspective could well reveal a great deal
of knew knowledge).

The issue to me personally is that humans, me included of course, live in
such an institualized "system". These "rights" result in laws and I
believe that an understanding of PCT will help greatly in understanding
1) When a law will and will not actually be related to a "right" 2)
When a "right" will and will not actually be related to a philisophically
developed system and 3) When a philsophical system is actually
consistant with how people function.

I know that with as little time as I have with PCT and in particular with
a little studying of the concepts and experiments, I already realize that
much of what I believed to be "fundamental" human characteristics
probably are not.

One can reasonably conclude that PCT indicates that in general, when one
person trys to control another person or for that matter is just trying
to control a perception that causes a disturbance to another person's
perception that is also being controlled, then conflict results. Though
not necessarily in all situations, it is clear that if this condition is
severe enough, that one or both people may suffer some amount of "harm".

Thus, in a way, it seems that one should conclude from understanding PCT
that one should "pretty much let everyone else 'do their own thing'". I
actually don't have a whole lot of trouble with that idea. That is, at
least I don't personally have much desire to control others and indeed
would have had a much easier time of "parenting" had I known anything
about PCT at the time.

Trouble is that not all people would (even if they understood PCT) allow
others to "control well". It is a serious philosophical question and one
that I fervently believe that PCT offers a great deal of insight.

I still believe that one can and should try to determine what behaviour
is or is not conducive to allowing a human to be a human.

-bill